State Says Thomas County Broke the Law

PATRICK HENRY ONCE SAID THAT LIBERTY IS NEVER SECURE
AS LONG AS GOVERNMENT DOES BUSINESS IN SECRET.

The Liberty Sentinel, Feb. 28, 2008

(Colby Free Press) Thomas County Commissioners have an opportunity to avoid prosecution for two Kansas Open Meetings Act violations that took place Dec 28, 2007.

Commissioners Ken Christiansen, Paul Steele and Byron Sowers have until March 5 to accept a settlement agreement offered by the Kansas Attorney Generals Office. Assistant Attorney General Michael Smith, in a letter dated Feb. 4, told Thomas County Attorney Andrea Wyrick the commissioners violated the Open Meetings Act by "discussing a salary plan that covered all non-elected county employees behind closed doors."

Smith said a second violation took place when the commissioners failed to open the doors when they said they would.

Smith is giving Christiansen, Steele and Sowers six months to obtain one and one-half hours training on the provisions of the KOMA, according to the settlement agreement. The training must be paid for out of each commissioner's own pocket, not county money.

In addition to getting training about the Kansas Open Meetings Act, the commissioners must not violate the act in the future. Should they do so, the agreement would be nullified and they could face prosecution.

According to the act, any member of a body or agency who knowingly violates any of the provisions of it or intentionally fails to furnish information as required by it shall be liable for the payment of a civil penalty of not more than $500 for each violation. Smith said the state is offering the commissioners the opportunity to enter into the agreement as a way to avoid expending additional time and resources on this matter.

Besides the commissioners, those meeting for non-elected personnel matters were Road and Bridge Supervisor Clair Schrock, Landfill Supervisor Larry Jumper, Emergency Medical Service Director Ken Gatlin, Undersheriff Allen Marcum, Sheriff Mike Baughn, Register of Deeds Maybelle Moore and County Clerk Shelly Harms. Baughn, Moore and Harms are elected officials, all three of which do not qualify as non-elected personnel.

Colby Free Press Editor Patty Decker contacted the Attorney Generals office after Colby Free Press reporter Kevin Johnson reported his suspicion the commissioners violated the act. Steele was the only one of the three commissioners who believed the executive session was inappropriate, according to Decker's complaint filed with the state.


Let's Be Clear on Open Meetings Act

PATRICK HENRY ONCE SAID THAT LIBERTY IS NEVER SECURE
AS LONG AS GOVERNMENT DOES BUSINESS IN SECRET.

The Topeka Capital-Journal Editorial Board, Feb. 16, 2008

In a perfect world, there would be no need for proposals like the one introduced by Sen. Tim Huelskamp to clarify the Kansas Open Meetings Act.

But an action by some members of the Topeka City Council -- an imperfect group if ever there was one -- provides ample reason why Huelskamp's bill deserves consideration.

The proposal by Huelskamp, a Republican from Fowler, would prohibit members of governing bodies from engaging in "serial communications."

That term has become part of the Topeka lexicon since last December, when the city council made its end run around Mayor Bill Bunten's veto of the purchase of a backup police helicopter.

To recap, the open meetings flap came to light after five members of the council voted in favor of another type of a "communication" -- this one a governing body procedure -- to approve the helicopter purchase.

Later, it was revealed Deputy Mayor Brett Blackburn had contacted four members of the council -- Jack Woelfel, Jeff Preisner, Deborah Swank and Lana Kennedy -- by phone to seek their support of the "communication." Some other members of the governing body hadn't been made aware of the action.

And who were the five who voted for the "communication"? Blackburn, Woelfel, Preisner, Swank and Kennedy.

Enter Shawnee County District Attorney Robert Hecht, who investigated the discussions between the five council members.

Hecht determined there was no violation of the law. However, he ruled Blackburn may have violated the spirit of the law in contacting his four fellow council members.

And that's where Huelskamp has stepped in.

With help from Mike Kautsch, a professor of media law at The University of Kansas, Huelskamp drafted a bill aimed at barring individual communications "that collectively involve a majority of a quorum and that share a common topic of discussion."

Kautsch summed up the need for the bill this way: "One should not be using the exception for meetings of fewer than a majority of a quorum to generate a consensus on a single issue that ought to be discussed before the public."

We couldn't agree more.

Blackburn also welcomed the proposal, saying he believed any clarification in the open meetings law is a good thing.

There's definitely a fine point to be determined here. In ruling the "communication" caper wasn't a violation of the law, Hecht cited prior court rulings saying serial communications had to be interactive -- in other words, that each person Blackburn called had to understand they were part of the majority of a quorum.

The four council members who spoke with Blackburn contended Blackburn had asked only about their support of the "communication." They said Blackburn didn't mention others to whom he was talking about the issue.

What the issue proved, though, is that there is wiggle room in the open meetings law.

Here's wishing Huelskamp the best of luck in tightening the rules.


Do you have an Open Government experience to share?
E-mail it to rgannon@kspress.com


Liberty Sentinel Archives